Content

[bgmnts]

  Is it me or is there something wholly depressing about labelling things 'content'? I watched a video where Stewart Lee brought it up with Alan Moore and, as he said, it's probably - technically - an accurate term. Anything is literally content isn't it?
  But I don't know, I just find it so lacking in any respect for what you do when you label your videos/images/whatever as content, or refer to yourself as a 'content creator'.
   Okay, if you're on twitch and you're literally just playing a video game whilst talking to an anonymous chat room, that is probably just content; white noise, put on in the background etc but if you make videos or do essays or write articles or whatever it seems a bit crap to just say yeah I create content. Makes everything anyone does seem like pointless mulch all thrown onto some digital slag heap.

Anyway, probably a mountain out of a molehill and a shit topic but fuck you its my content, I cherish my content.

[ASFTSN]

It's not just you, no. It's an outright admission of the fact that to succeed as a somebody now you just need to keep shovelling the pabulum.

[QDRPHNC]

Yes, it's soulless LinkedIn marketing speak.

[the]

It points to a mindset of viewing the world as a giant framework, which is there and ready to be populated by 'content'.

Of course, when viewed in that way, any artistic endeavour or intellectual work produced for consumption by other people would become classified as 'content'.

But there's something in the way "content" is currently used that contains an inherent euphemism for 'as much as possible'. It can be something other than a product of an artistic, spiritual or intellectual process. A saleable commodity, churn it out quickly and in bulk for personal gain.

(Usually involving the monetising of talking about yourself, or about someone else's works or actions.)

[AllisonSays]

The other one that I've seen Americans (I think - on Reddit and that) use is 'media', as in, 'you can't judge someone's character from the media they consume', or whatever. Like with content I guess it's technically an accurate description but it just makes it sound so mechanical and unpleasant.

[thenoise]

Yeah seems a reasonable word to use for the career youtubers, who have to make sure to churn out something every week in order to keep reminding people of that one video they made once that went viral, or whatever, so that sufficient people click on it out of curiosity so that they get their monthly $15.94.

Never heard it used in the context of actual people on proper TV or touring actual theatres.

[shagatha crustie]

I work in marketing (boooooooo) and we use 'content' to mean 'something actually worthwhile to put out.'

So if you're trying to promote an event, if you just make a text-only post saying 'this event will be good,' that's poor marketing because there's no 'content' - instead you could do a video, or a designed gif, or a giveaway, or a competition, or whatever. 'Content' equates to something substantial to catch people's attention. You can throw all the money in the world at it but if there's no content of some decent description then you're fucked.

However I realise in the wider context of our dismal world of late stage capitalism it's become a ridiculously amorphous word that means 'anything that can be viewed/experienced/communicated.' People who say 'relatable content' in response to something in a face to face conversation can get fucked.

[JaDanketies]

I work with content, specifically text, which I always call content when I'm talking to a client, although I should call it text.

I'd say content is merely text, videos, images, or some combination of all three such as infographics. And I'm shit at two-thirds of it.

You do need to keep shovelling (good) content out these days if you want to successfully market your business on the internet. Google likes content. Content is king, as we content producers say.

[Icehaven]

It's the way it implies that everything on the internet is just there to fill it up, to be a presence online rather than for it's own sake, and that it's intangible and therefore ultimately disposable in a way that actual books or paintings or whatever aren't. It also reduces it all to the same thing, putting your examples of a mindless twitch video and a thoroughly researched, well written article in the same bracket just because they're both consumed via the internet. 
That said it's probably sort of cynically fitting to have this reductive term for, well, everything online, as ease of access has come with a loss of appreciation for the creativity and effort that goes into a lot of work, particularly if you can't remember when it wasn't so easy to watch, read, see or listen to virtually anything you want in seconds at your own convenience.

[idunnosomename]

My patrons can read my reply to this post exclusively on my Patreon

[JaDanketies]

All this web marketing shit is bollocks anyway. If a site is number one on Google, that doesn't mean its services are any good. I got flimflammers up to number one before I decided to start behaving in a moral way in business.

If I look for 'bananas in Cambridge' on Google, I will find a website that has some great content about bananas, and maybe lots of banana-related links pointing to it, and possibly even some 5 star reviews. That doesn't mean when I turn up at the shop it will have any nice bananas for sale. They might be all brown and squishy, or might be sold out.

I think Google knows this too, and one day it's gonna figure out a better way to decide what website to send someone to if they look for 'bananas in Cambridge' that doesn't involve content, and make my skills obsolete. When we're all wearing wearable tech that monitors our heartbeat and tracks our eye movements, why would Google give a shit about how good a banana shop's blog is? They'll send me to the banana place that is most likely to please others that have had a craving for bananas.

Other people in my industry hate this fact - that their work has nothing at all to do with how good a business is, that we run contrary to Google's goals, and that technology will make us obsolete.

[Beagle 2]

I also work in CONTENT and I'm sure the way we're told that people CONSUME CONTENT is bollocks. It seems to take longer and longer to put together something that communicates basic information. So we spend ages putting together explainer animations or creating videos, podcasts, infographics, whatever piece of INNOVATIVE DIGITAL CONTENT we are told is seeing a 10483% rise in popularity, and I almost always end up thinking I could write this down in 50 words and someone could read it and that's that. I know it's more about attracting attention in the first place so maybe if I just type 50 words but also get my willy out?

[QDRPHNC]

Marketing has been gazing into it's own anus for a long time.

[shagatha crustie]

I also work in CONTENT and I'm sure the way we're told that people CONSUME CONTENT is bollocks. It seems to take longer and longer to put together something that communicates basic information. So we spend ages putting together explainer animations or creating videos, podcasts, infographics, whatever piece of INNOVATIVE DIGITAL CONTENT we are told is seeing a 10483% rise in popularity, and I almost always end up thinking I could write this down in 50 words and someone could read it and that's that. I know it's more about attracting attention in the first place so maybe if I just type 50 words but also get my willy out?

Surely this is just a response to the sheer amount of CONTENT that is already on the web and needing to stand out because of people's increasingly diminished attention spans.

[Buelligan]

The other one that I've seen Americans (I think - on Reddit and that) use is 'media', as in, 'you can't judge someone's character from the media they consume', or whatever. Like with content I guess it's technically an accurate description but it just makes it sound so mechanical and unpleasant.

I entirely agree.  If someone described their own action as curating the media and content they/others consume, I would definitely search with alacrity for the out door.

[touchingcloth]

If nothing is content, then what am I supposed to curate?

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

Diss content.

I don't consider myself a content creator. I'm more of a stuff maker.

[shiftwork2]

I've probably got around 8000 days left to live so anything marked 'content' can GET FUCKED

alright cheers

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Media refers to platforms by which 'content', can be conveyed, hosted, and so on.

An individual (let's refer to them as a consumer to be extra soulless) can consume contents, but not media.

Perhaps a huge corporate entity could consume media, eg. by taking total control over a particular medium and its content.

Otherwise it seems silly to talk about consuming media.

Of course it also seems depressing to talk about consuming content


Silly and depressing.

[DistressedArea]

Is this content?

[Beagle 2]

This is content.

This is innovative content.

[Icehaven]

This is mal content

[ASFTSN]

Is something brilliant happening?

[idunnosomename]

I curled out a lovely bit of content this morning, head over to my insta to check it out

insta.com/pootube